I find this discussion flawed as the dwg of a wheel set still uses a Back to Back dimension. Back to Back has nothing to do with a correctly gaged wheel set! It is Check gage that is most Important with the track and wheel check equal to each other inorder to have derailment free track work. You can have mulitple wheel sizes work on the same track IF they use the same check gage. That includes the shitty looking flyer wheel sets. I use code 100, 93 & 88 wheels on my railroad all work perfectly as they all have the same check gage. There is no excuse for having three different wheel contours on the same engine. Just plane lousy engineering. Paul
________________________________ From: bcgsteam <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, September 2, 2012 8:45 AM Subject: {S-Scale List} Re: "S"tandardization of wheels...... Ed, I thought you might have the specifics on this. Three flanges on one engine...amazing! The S SIG is working hard to promote using S standards among scale manufacturers. Maybe someone needs to work just as hard to get a set of standards for 'non-scale' manufacturers, if that's even possible. Brooks --- In [email protected], "Ed" <Loizeaux@...> wrote: > > > there are no standards for 'hi-rail' wheels. I don't believe that AM, SHS > > (now MTH) and Lionel (to name three) all use the same profiles. > > Brooks....It is even worse than that. I recently inspected a Lionel > articulated and found it had three different flange sizes on the same loco. > There were tender wheels, driver wheels and pilot/trailing truck wheels -- > each different from the other. After I pointed this out to a Lionel > employee, he said that was something they could improve upon. Next year's > batch of locos might be better as a result. Cheers...Ed L. > ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
